Warning for the west coast; Radiation levels from Japan

Beefbisquit

Well-Known Member
[video=youtube_share;iTqzqoKMLEg]http://youtu.be/iTqzqoKMLEg[/video]

This is pretty scary, if it's accurate. Possible North American west coast evacuation?
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
I've been saying...we are a bunch of foolish monkeys playing with fire. We are the fools that defeat all foolproof. Not worthy and too confused, silly little monkeys.

Oh, wait. Another earthquake. 95% in the next 3 years!!!!!

 

Doer

Well-Known Member
This is too much to process. The stats don't sound good.
Oh good. Nothing to worry about...

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/nov/07/fukushima-nuclear-cleanup-spent-fuel

Later this month the plant's operator, Tokyo Electric Power (Tepco), will begin removing more than 1,500 fuel assemblies from the pool, the first step in a decommissioning process expected to last at least three decades.


On Thursday, the Guardian witnessed Tepco's preparations for an unprecedented operation that the utility's critics claim has the potential to end in disaster.


The risk posed to the reactor by earthquakes and other natural catastrophes has made removal of the fuel – 1,331 spent assemblies and 202 fresh ones – a matter of urgency. An event similar to the 9.0 magnitude quake that crippled the plant on 11 March 2011 could collapse the fuel pool altogether, some observers say, leading to the leaking of huge quantities of radiation into the atmosphere. Tepco, however, insists the structure could withstand such a quake.
-----------------------------------------------
So, the plant didn't protect the reactor the first time. And they will say that the cracked fuel pool, already tottering high in the back, above the reactor, will hold for a second event?

Double=think is everywhere. If it is 95% chance of a 7.5 or above in three years..and 30 years to remove it all, that makes highly unlikely this will succeed.

They meant the West Coast of Japan.....right? RIGHT???
 

burgertime2010

Well-Known Member
I find it hard to believe a 7.5 magnitude earthquake is 95% certain. That is a very large earthquake and somewhat rare. I wonder how these #'s are derived.
 

racerboy71

bud bootlegger
Oh good. Nothing to worry about...

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/nov/07/fukushima-nuclear-cleanup-spent-fuel

Later this month the plant's operator, Tokyo Electric Power (Tepco), will begin removing more than 1,500 fuel assemblies from the pool, the first step in a decommissioning process expected to last at least three decades.


On Thursday, the Guardian witnessed Tepco's preparations for an unprecedented operation that the utility's critics claim has the potential to end in disaster.


The risk posed to the reactor by earthquakes and other natural catastrophes has made removal of the fuel – 1,331 spent assemblies and 202 fresh ones – a matter of urgency. An event similar to the 9.0 magnitude quake that crippled the plant on 11 March 2011 could collapse the fuel pool altogether, some observers say, leading to the leaking of huge quantities of radiation into the atmosphere. Tepco, however, insists the structure could withstand such a quake.
-----------------------------------------------
So, the plant didn't protect the reactor the first time. And they will say that the cracked fuel pool, already tottering high in the back, above the reactor, will hold for a second event?

Double=think is everywhere. If it is 95% chance of a 7.5 or above in three years..and 30 years to remove it all, that makes highly unlikely this will succeed.

They meant the West Coast of Japan.....right? RIGHT???
I was just going to say doer, why are they evacuating the west coast of the us when pretty much nothing is being done In Japan ffs..
It really is an eff'ed situation, and I don't really seeing it getting much coverage on main stream media, not that I can stand to watch the news anyhoo..
 

Doer

Well-Known Member
Good point, Mr. H. He has made his career on controversy. Main backer of the AGW foul up long before we had any data.

OTH, we know the Science establishment has closed ranks. And much of that is about the AGW handwaving, Big oil fails, supposedly.

So, in that, he is something of a turncoat. The double=think would have him supporting Nukes.

Therefore, I sense the grain of truth.
 

ginjawarrior

Well-Known Member
bad cases of radiophobia

[h=3]Fukushima[/h]The fear of radiation manifested itself on many occasions after the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami in Japan, which severely damaged a nuclear power plant. The nuclear crisis received 51% of all news coverage about the disaster.[SUP][13][/SUP] No one was killed by radiation released in the accident, although five people died at the plant from other causes (tsunami and stress).[SUP][17][/SUP] Other events, such as a refinery fire,[SUP][18][/SUP] a dam collapse which actually killed some people,[SUP][19][/SUP] and the general devastation and 30,000 dead and missing from the earthquake and tsunami, did not receive as much attention.
Overly strict regulations only made the problem worse. Many batches of food which showed increased radioactivity were considered unfit for consumption, even though it would be virtually impossible for anyone to suffer any ill effect from eating it.[SUP][20][/SUP] Eating the worst contaminated spinach in large quantities for a year would result in as much exposure as a CT scan. CT scans are routine medical procedure and result in about 10 mSv of exposure, or about three times the yearly natural background. It would be impossible to eat the contaminated batches of spinach for an entire year, because it would spoil. Similar over-conservatism prompted a warning against giving tap water to babies, which did nothing except scare people that their water supply is in danger.[SUP][21][/SUP] If an infant drank 1 liter of tap water every day for a year (hardly possible), the exposure would be about as harmful as a CT scan is to an adult (basically not at all). Iodine-131 decays almost completely in 90 days. Given that the reactors were damaged and the fission process was stopped, they would not produce any new iodine-131, so it would be impossible for the reported level of contamination to persist over an entire year. The contaminated spinach and water never posed any real danger to anyone, but paranoid regulations made them seem like a big problem.
In fact, the radiation levels in the exclusion zone around Fukushima Daiichi 25 days after the incident at that power plant are no more than one tenth of the radiation levels in the exclusion zone around Chernobyl 25 years after that disaster, yet Fukushima was rated a level 7 on the International Nuclear Event Scale (which goes from zero to seven, the latter being the highest).




http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Radiophobia
http://nuclearradiophobia.blogspot.co.uk/
http://energyfromthorium.com/radiophobia-the-fear-of-radiation/
 
Top